Banks v. State of Alabama et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/3/14. (ASL)
2014 Jul-03 AM 11:53
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
CHRISTOPHER D. BANKS,
STATE OF ALABAMA, et al.,
Case No. 5:14-cv-00329-VEH-JEO
This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc.
9). While objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by June 2, 2014, none have been
The court has considered the entire file in this action together with the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation (doc. 9) and has reached an independent conclusion that the Report
and Recommendation is due to be adopted and approved. The court hereby ADOPTS and
APPROVES the findings and recommendation of the magistrate judge as the findings and
conclusions of the court. In accordance with the recommendation, this petition for writ of habeas
corpus is due to be dismissed with prejudice. An appropriate order will be entered.
The court further finds that Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial
of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the court DECLINES to issue a Certificate of Appealability.
On 06/16/2014, Petitioner filed a Request for a Book of Stamps and a Statement of Claims. (Docs. 10 and
11). The Request was denied by Order dated 06/17/2014. (Order, doc. 11). The request for appointment of counsel,
contained within the Statement of Claims, was denied by Order dated 06/17/2014. (Order, doc. 12). On 06/30/2014,
Petitioner filed a document entitled “Plaintiff(s) Appropriate Completed.” (Doc. 13). Nowhere in any of these
documents filed by Petitioner has he responded to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation that his §
2254 Petition be dismissed as untimely. The requests contained within document 13 are hereby DENIED.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
DONE this the 3rd day of July, 2014.
VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?